In a recent article here in the Herald, Urizenus Sklar argued that the US Attorney in the Barrett Brown case was attempting to smear Barrett by listing a whole number of allegedly bad attributes of Barrett and then publishing them in a public court document.

I think Uri missed the bigger picture here. Not that Uri is wrong. But Uri missed the fact that larded into the US Attorney's comments is a tacit indictment of the entire US criminal justice system.

The US Attorney's screed against Barrett looked like this:

Perhaps without realizing the prejudicial effects on brown the media repeatedly has publicized potentially inadmissible and prejudicial information such as Brown’s … anarchist ideology… troubled childhood and alternative schooling, declaration that he is an atheist, use and abuse of ecstasy, acid, heroin, and marijuana, lack of steady employment, claimed diagnoses of ADHD and depression, associates descriptions of Brown as a junkie, name fag, moral fag, court jester…

Now, the question is this: Why on God's Green Earth should it be impossible, or even difficult, for someone who is an atheist, or someone who is depressed, or someone who has ADHD or someone who lacks steady employment, or someone who has used drugs to get a fair trial in this country?

You see the deep point here is that implicit in the US Attorney's statement is the admission that for people who are even just a tiny bit outside of the mainstream, the justice system can not be counted on to be fair to them. Any perceived flaw which sets you outside of a Norman Rockwell ideal is enough to ensure that the justice system, if you find your way into it, will grind you to pieces. Tiny pieces.

If you are depressed, you cannot count on the justice system to be fair to you.

If you use marijuana, you cannot count on the justice system to be fair to you.

If you had alternative schooling or raised by alternative parenting, you cannot count on the justice system to be fair to you.

If you are a student of, or influenced by, anarchist writings, you cannot count on the justice system to be fair to you.

If you were once a heroine addict, now on Suboxone, you cannot count on the justice system to be fair to you.

If you had a troubled childhood, you cannot count on the justice system to be fair to you.

If you lack steady employment, you cannot count on the justice system to be fair to you.

If you are a moral fag (that is, if you are ethically motivated hacker), you cannot count on the justice system to be fair to you.

In short, if you are remotely alternative and outside of the power structure, you cannot count on the justice system to be fair to you.

That you US Attorney, for admitting this. Now, when do we begin to fix the problem?

No such thing as normal. If the justice system was fair or just they’d replace it immediately.

honeyboobooisfatandsoru

Oct 2nd, 2013

just throwing this out there…
“Since 1999, many case files are maintained in electronic format and are accessible through the internet service Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) or from the public access terminals in the clerk’s office of the court in which the case was filed.”

On that note, there was a news article that I really liked back in the day which was provided by LulzSec. Tupac living in New Zealand…if that hints at an idea…

There was also a great episode of Lucy the Daughter of the Devil, where the devil and his secretary put up a map of sex offenders, but arranged their locations on the internet to look like a big smiley face on the country when people looked them up.

toyotabedzrock

Nov 5th, 2013

So tell me why this prosecutor has not been ground down into pulp with thousands of items sent to her door and thousands of calls and black faxes.